Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Stemless shoulder arthroplasty—current results and designs

  • Shoulder Arthroplasty (G Athwal, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Reviews in Musculoskeletal Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Stemless shoulder arthroplasty was originally introduced in 2004 by a single manufacturer. Now, over a decade later, numerous designs are available outside the USA, but as yet, only one implant has been cleared by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and is available for use within the USA. Often referred to as “canal sparing,” these implants are designed for metaphyseal fixation to minimize humeral bone removal, avoid intraoperative and postoperative humeral fracture complications, and to decrease morbidity associated with revision operations. Recently, the second generation of stemless arthroplasty, a convertible implant allowing use in either anatomic or reverse arthroplasty configuration, was released for use outside the USA. This paper will review the available designs, reported results, and raise potential concerns for this emerging technology.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. Neer II CS. Replacement arthroplasty for glenohumeral osteoarthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1974;56(1):1–13.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Athwal GS, Sperling JW, Rispoli DM, Cofield RH. Periprosthetic humeral fractures during shoulder arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009;91:594–603. doi:10.2106/JBJS.H.00439.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Bohsali KI, Wirth MA, Rockwood Jr CA. Complications of total shoulder arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006;88:2279–92. doi:10.2106/JBJS.F.00125.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Boyd Jr AD, Thornhill TS, Barnes CL. Fractures adjacent to humeral prostheses. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1992;74(10):1498–504.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Campbell JT, Moore RS, Iannotti JP, Norris TR, Williams GR. Periprosthetic humeral fractures: mechanisms of fracture and treatment options. J Shoulder Elb Surg. 1998;7(4):406–13.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Chin PY, Sperling JW, Cofield RH, Schleck C. Complications of total shoulder arthroplasty: are they fewer or different? J Shoulder Elb Surg. 2006;15:19–22. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2005.05.005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Cil A, Veillette CJ, Sanchez-Sotelo J, Sperling JW, Schleck C, Cofield RH. Revision of the humeral component for aseptic loosening in arthroplasty of the shoulder. J Bone Joint Surg (Br). 2009;91(1):75–81. doi:10.1302/0301-620X.91B1.21094.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Cil A, Veillette CJ, Sanchez-Sotelo J, Sperling JW, Schleck CD, Cofield RH. Survivorship of the humeral component in shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elb Surg. 2010;19(1):143–50. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2009.04.011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Deshmukh AV, Koris M, Zurakowski D, Thornhill TS. Total shoulder arthroplasty: long-term survivorship, functional outcome, and quality of life. J Shoulder Elb Surg. 2005;14:471–9. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2005.02.009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Farng E, Zingmond D, Krenek L, Soohoo NF. Factors predicting complications rates after primary shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elb Surg. 2011;20:557–63. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2010.11.005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Kumar S, Sperling JW, Haidukewych GH, Cofield RH. Periprosthetic humeral fractures after shoulder arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004;86:680–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Nagels J, Stokdijk M, Rozing PM. Stress shielding and bone resorption in shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elb Surg. 2003;12(1):35–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Raiss P, Edwards TB, Deutsch A, Shah A, Bruckner T, Loew M, et al. Radiographic changes around humeral components in shoulder arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2014;96(7), e54. doi:10.2106/JBJS.M.00378.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Sperling JW, Cofield RH, Rowland CM. Minimum fifteen-year follow-up of neer hemiarthroplasty and total shoulder arthroplasty in patients aged fifty years or younger. J Shoulder Elb Surg. 2004;13:604–13. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2004.03.013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Steinmann SP, Cheung EV. Treatment of periprosthetic humerus fractures associated with shoulder arthroplasty. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2008;16(4):199–207.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Wirth MA, Rockwood Jr CA. Complications of shoulder arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1994;307:47–69.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Wirth MA, Rockwood Jr CA. Complications of total shoulder replacement arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1996;78:603–16.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Wright TW, Cofield RH. Humeral fractures after shoulder arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1995;77(9):1340–6.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Wutzler S, Laurer HL, Huhnstock S, Geiger EV, Buehren V, Marzi I. Periprosthetic humeral fractures after shoulder arthroplasty: operative management and functional outcome. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2009;129(2):237–43. doi:10.1007/s00402-008-0746-z.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Johnston PS, Creighton RA, Romeo AA. Humeral component revision arthroplasty: outcomes of a split osteotomy technique. J Shoulder Elb Surg. 2012;21(4):502–6. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2011.02.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Phipatanakul WP, Bowen JM, Jobe CM. Removal of well-fixed flanged humeral prostheses may require humeral expansion. J Shoulder Elb Surg. 2009;18(5):724–7. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2008.11.021.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Sahota S, Sperling JW, Cofield RH. Humeral windows and longitudinal splits for component removal in revision shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elb Surg. 2014;23(10):1485–91. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2014.02.004. An excellent report reviewing humeral window and longitudinal revision techniques for stemmed implants. 23 of 26 windows healed and 17 of 19 longitudinal splits healed. There were no cases of malunion or clinical loosening at last follow up.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Van Thiel GS, Halloran JP, Twigg S, Romeo AA, Nicholson GP. The vertical humeral osteotomy for stem removal in revision shoulder arthroplasty: results and technique. J Shoulder Elb Surg. 2011;20(8):1248–54. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2010.12.013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Huguet D, DeClercq G, Rio B, Teissier J, Zipoli B, TESS Group. Results of a new stemless shoulder prosthesis: radiologic proof of maintained fixation and stability after a minimum of three years’ follow-up. J Shoulder Elb Surg. 2010;19(6):847–52. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2009.12.009. The original paper regarding stemless shoulder arthroplasty results. Sixty-three patients involved, 44 received a hemiarthroplasty and 19 a total shoulder arthroplasty. This paper has three year minimum results with good outcome measures including Constant score and range of motion. 11.1% revision rate at final follow up.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Berth A, Pap G. Stemless shoulder prosthesis versus conventional anatomic shoulder prosthesis in patients with osteoarthritis. J Orthop Traumatol. 2013;14(1):31–7. doi:10.1007/s10195-012-0216-9. The only prospective, randomized study comparing stemmed and stemless shoulder arthroplasty. This is a two year minimum follow up study showing no difference in clinical or radiographic results between the two groups. Significantly shorter operative time and blood loss was noted in the stemless group.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Churchill RS, Chuinard C, Wiater JM, Friedman R, Freehill M, Jacobson S, et al. Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes of the Simpliciti Canal Sparing Shoulder Arthroplasty System: A prospective 2 year multi-center study. J Bone Joint Surg., Accepted, publication date pending. JBJS-D-15-00181R4. The largest and most complete of the stemless arthroplasty reports. 149 patients with complete data at 2 weeks, 3 months, 1 year and 2 years follow up. This is the IDE study that obtained FDA clearance for the Simpliciti stemless system, the only stemless system available in the United States.

  27. Habermeyer P, Lichtenberg S, Tauber M, Magosch P. Midterm results of stemless shoulder arthroplasty: a prospective study. J Shoulder Elb Surg. 2015;24(9):1463–72. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2015.02.023. The only midterm report on stemless shoulder arthroplasty. This paper reviews the 5 year clinical and radiographic results of the Eclipse implant. Radiographic bone loss in the metaphyseal region was noted in over 46% of patients at final follow up.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Ballas R, Beguin L. Results of a stemless reverse shoulder prosthesis at more than 58 months mean without loosening. J Shoulder Elb Surg. 2013;22(9):e1–6. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2012.12.005. The first report available on a reverse stemless shoulder arthroplasty system. This paper reviews the minimum three year follow up of the TESS reverse implant. Revision rate was 7% at latest follow up.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Teissier P, Teissier J, Kouyoumdjian P, Asencio G. The TESS reverse shoulder arthroplasty without a stem in the treatment of cuff-deficient shoulder conditions: clinical and radiographic results. J Shoulder Elb Surg. 2015;24(1):45–51. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2014.04.005. Two year minimum results on 91 patients with the TESS reverse implant. Excellent outcomes noted with Constant score and range of motion. Revision rate 1% at final follow up.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Churchill RS. Stemless shoulder arthroplasty: current status. J Shoulder Elb Surg. 2014;23(9):1409–14. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2014.05.005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Aurora Medical Center—Grafton, 975 Port Washington Rd #110, Grafton, WI, 53024, USA

    R. Sean Churchill

  2. University of Western Ontario, St Joseph’s Health Care, London, Ontario, Canada

    George S. Athwal

Authors
  1. R. Sean Churchill
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. George S. Athwal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to R. Sean Churchill.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Dr. R. Sean Churchill reports royalties from Tornier, Inc.

Dr. George Athwal has the potential to receive royalties from Imascap and Tornier. Additionally, he is a consultant for Depuy-Synthes.

Human and animal rights and informed consent

Research involving human and animal subjects was performed in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and was approved by the IRB.

Additional information

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Shoulder Arthroplasty

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Churchill, R.S., Athwal, G.S. Stemless shoulder arthroplasty—current results and designs. Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med 9, 10–16 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12178-016-9320-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12178-016-9320-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation